Faultlines and frailties
Growing disquiet over a lack of leadership from politicians and business leaders in addressing the vulnerabilities of the UK’s food system was summed up in two letters dispatched to Whitehall this week.
In the first, over 180 experts warned the UK is “complacent” and unprepared for food emergencies linked to extreme weather, geopolitical volatility and other structural weaknesses.
In the second letter, a group of civil society organisations, including the food and farming alliance Sustain, asked Defra to provide an update on the government’s plans for the next stage of England’s national food strategy, following IGD’s announcement that it is leading the development of a ‘Food Nation 2040’ framework for action.
Footprint has since received confirmation that Food Nation 2040 is not the next stage of the ‘Good Food Cycle’ food strategy, nor a rebranding under a new banner, and that Defra will continue to lead the strategy with metrics due to be published early next year showing how progress towards the 10 priority outcomes will be measured. (The question of who is really leading England’s food strategy is the subject for Monday’s Footprint In Focus feature.)
Meanwhile, the latest warning over the UK food system’s lack of preparedness to deal with supply shocks came in the week The Grocer revealed Defra has created a new food resilience committee dedicated to tackling the risk to food security from climate change and supply chain shortages.
It follows last week’s warning by a group of food industry whistle-blowers that the current food supply chain will not be resilient in the face of the climate crisis.
Addressed to the prime minister, Andy Burnham, and the first secretary of state, Louise Haigh, the latest letter was delivered to 10 Downing Street by a group including Tim Lang, professor emeritus of food policy at City St George’s, University of London; Carina Millstone, executive director, of the campaign group, Foodrise; and Paul Behrens, British Academy global professor at the University of Oxford.
In it, a diverse group of over 180 food system stakeholders including academics, farmers, community food leaders and a retired Lieutenant General, Richard Nugee, spelled out how a “food system built over recent decades is not fit for today’s or tomorrow’s challenges”.
Shocks and threats from geopolitics, climate heating, ransomware, energy outages, software malfunction and disinformation, will fall upon a system that is “highly wasteful, import-dependent, environmentally unsustainable, and driven by the pursuit of private profit rather than resilience, with millions of people unable to afford a decent, healthy diet”, the letter stated.
Although the group welcomed the Burnham government’s continuation of the resilience work begun under Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership, the signatories suggested official government advice for households to store a few days’ supply of food at home paid “scant attention […] to the form that store should take or the practicalities and affordability of such recommendations for many lower-income households”.
Among a series of asks of government, signatories called for Defra to be rebranded as the Department for Environment and Food Security, “to reflect the department’s vital role in national security”.
They also want to see the government commission an audit of the food system’s current reliance on a few, very large food firms, and place responsibility for food storage on national, regional, local and community storage schemes, not only on the public.
“We need system shift: grow more food; more regionalism, diversity and storage at multiple levels, not just households; and public engagement in civil food defence,” said Lang. “Central government must provide more strategic leadership while encouraging actions at different levels. Communities and households cannot resolve faultlines in the UK’s food system.”
Small Bites
Procurement target under threat from data delay
Defra is not due to complete a data-gathering exercise on the origin and sustainability of food in public sector supply chains until next summer, raising doubts over the likelihood of the Labour government meeting its ambition for 50% of public sector food to be locally produced or certified to higher environmental standards. Following the commitment made in Labour’s 2024 election manifesto, Defra set about gathering data from caterers to understand the extent to which public sector settings are already serving food from local and sustainable sources and what further action is needed. Information on the origin and sustainability of food in public sector supply chains is said to be limited and Footprint understands work to create a baseline is now expected to take until the summer of 2027 to be completed. Defra is still considering a range of possible policy options for delivering the 50% ambition, including potentially updating the ‘Government buying standards for food and catering services’. In 2025, the government published a new national procurement policy statement which sets expectations for government contracts to favour products certified to high environmental standards. Defra has also provided five local authorities with a funding pot of £775,000 to improve how food is procured, increase the provision of healthier and more sustainable food options, and support local and small food businesses to better understand how to supply to the public sector.
New standard aims for consistent food footprinting
Food businesses are being urged to make inconsistent product carbon footprinting a thing of the past by throwing their weight behind a new standard. The Global Sustainable Transition Alliance (GSTA), convened by Wrap and Wageningen University & Research, is calling on all food and drink businesses worldwide to support it in creating a single, scientifically robust rulebook for calculating product level environmental footprints for the sector. GSTA, whose founding members include Ahold Delhaize, Mars, Mondra and Foodsteps, says the development of a single footprinting global standard will save the food and drink industry time and money, while also delivering consistent data reporting. Initially focusing on greenhouse gas emissions, GSTA will align and conform with major frameworks such as the GHG Protocol and add a high level of specificity and detail, with the aim of enabling genuinely comparable product footprints, regardless of who is calculating them. “Together, we want to create a shared foundation for comparable data to create faster, more informed decisions that drive measurable emissions reductions across the food and beverage industry,” said Sofie Schop, executive director at Wrap.
Businesses warned against fighting food regs through the courts
NGOs campaigning for responsible investment have demanded large food and drink businesses reassess their use of litigation to fight health regulations after evidence emerged of “an alarming pattern of litigious conduct” in recent years. In a joint public statement, ShareAction and the US-based Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR) expressed concern over the uptick in lawsuits filed by major food and drink companies, which they claim are designed to delay, dilute and derail public health laws. The statement follows the release of a recent study by Lighthouse Reports entitled ‘Big Food vs. The People’, which found that between 2010 and 2025 food companies filed 239 lawsuits in six countries, losing 82% of the cases to-date. The measures subject to legal challenge have included attempts to create front-of-package warning labels for certain foods and ban advertisements targeting young children. ShareAction and ICCR said the industry’s attempts to stall or weaken public health policies mirror strategies long used by the pharmaceutical and tobacco industries. They noted how lawsuits create significant burdens and resource strains on governments who have to fight to protect health policies, and suggested responsible companies have a clear opportunity to differentiate their business, build trust with investors and other stakeholders, and contribute towards a fairer, healthier and more prosperous society.
Chef’s Special
Wild venison is having a breakthrough year within the eating out of home sector. Footprint has previously reported on the trend for caterers to put wild venison on their menus as a more sustainable, affordable alternative to beef. Now, one of the UK’s biggest suppliers of wild venison, Lean + Wild, is claiming a high street first after the food-to-go chain Pure introduced wild venison to its range. Pure’s new autumn menu will see its High Protein Chilli made with a blend of British beef and British wild venison supplied by Lean + Wild as part of the brand’s focus on high-protein, nutrient dense dishes. Venison contains 21.5g of protein per 100g and around twice the iron of beef and lamb. Lean + Wild has estimated its emissions at 5.6kg CO₂e per kg, compared with 37.8kg CO₂e per kg for beef – a figure in line with the 85% carbon saving calculated by contract caterer Levy, which worked in partnership with data provider Foodsteps to calculate the impact of switching from beef to wild venison at venues including the Gtec Stadium and the Allianz Stadium, Twickenham. “Venison has a mild, rich flavour that works brilliantly in our High Protein Chilli, alongside British beef, to make a dish our customers already love even better,” said Spencer Craig, founder and CEO of Pure.
Last Orders
The Conservatives have promised to scrap extended producer responsibility for packaging (pEPR) if they win power at the next election. The pledge is part of a drive to reduce regulatory costs that the party says will support economic growth. The policy was announced by shadow chancellor Andrew Griffith at the Conservative Party conference in Birmingham this week. Griffith said he would “scrap Labour’s packaging tax” (a policy initially developed under the Conservative government) that he described as “an administrative nightmare for business that puts up the price of every supermarket shop”. pEPR is designed to shift the cost of managing household packaging waste away from local authorities towards packaging producers. The first year of the scheme raised over £1.4bn in fees. The Conservatives also announced their intention to scrap the Environment Agency and Natural England – a move that drew the ire of campaigners. “In an age when climate change and nature loss are a growing security threat, abolishing environmental regulators and safety standards amounts to gross negligence from any party that aspires to government,” said Craig Bennett, CEO at The Wildlife Trusts.
